Do the Democrats in Congress realize that if they sign onto this BBA, and place on the table

[still_one]

programs that those in need depend on the most, they will have just attacked the core of what the Democratic party stands for?

[Ruby the Liberal]

1. They are only agreeing to a vote

Rs need it for campaign fodder. They know it will never fly.

[Tx4obama]

2. The Senate can vote 'no' on the BBA. Also....

Also, it would have to be ratified by the states - and that just ain't gonna happen.

-----

An amendment may be ratified in three ways:

The new amendment may be approved by two-thirds of both houses of Congress, then sent to the states for approval.

Two-thirds of the state legislatures may apply to Congress for a constitutional convention to consider amendments, which are then sent to the states for approval.

Congress may require ratification by special convention. The convention method has been used only once, to approve the 21st Amendment (repealing prohibition, 1933).

Regardless of the method of proposing an amendment, final ratification requires approval by three-fourths of the states.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitution#Article_Five:_Amendments

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. Assuming it gets out of congress and senate

they might have enough state houses for it to pass.

This is... once again...



But at this point we should all get used to it...

[Tx4obama]

3. Update regarding BBA

From the Associated Press

SNIP

Congress would be required to vote on a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, but none of the debt limit increase would be contingent on its approval.

SNIP

http://tinyurl.com/3ryomow

[aquart]

8. NO.

[Tx4obama]

9. No, what? n/t

[lonestarlib]

4. Interesting, all the replies so far only address the BBA, not "the

programs that those in need depend on the most".

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. Party's changed and time people wise up to that

time to do what they have done... and ORGANIZE, ORGANIZE, ORGANIZE

[Tx4obama]

7. Probably because there is NO deal yet ...

so there have not yet been any specific programs that have been named, hard to discuss something that doesn't exist.

[readmoreoften]

13. So you're saying that if the Dems try to pass cuts against SS and Medicare, you'll denounce them?

And you'll agree that it terrible act of political betrayal? Think before you answer unless you're ready to eat crow.

[Tx4obama]

15. Perhaps you should reread my comment, then you can 'see' what I said. n/t

[Chan790]

10. Part of that might be...

that post-2012 when the GOP has gutshanked itself and we hold both houses of Congress and the WH, it'd be easy to roll back any cuts. The BBA would be a much larger deal to surmount, if it were ratified.

[Tx4obama]

14. The BBA won't make it out of the Senate. So, ratification isn't going to be a problem.

The Senate can vote 'no' on the BBA and that will be the end of the story.

See comment #3.

[Chan790]

18. I knew that...it just seems like a bigger betrayal.

I actually made the argument earlier that it was probably the smartest thing we did, once you get past the emotional kick in the groin. We made it into a bargaining chip by calling it non-negotiable, thus the GOP had to horse-trade to get it...it probably got us the longer deal we sought, and what ultimately did we give up in trading it away?

Nothing, since it won't be ratified. Still, people want to talk about it because it seems at first glance like an utter capitulation.

[joshcryer]

11. Do you believe that "programs that those in need depend on the most" are in jeopardy by a BBA vote?

If so, could you justify how? If not, how do you justify simply allowing a vote an "attack on the core of what the Democratic party stands for"? The core of the Democratic party is democracy.

The Republicans want to be able to have campaign ads that say "Democratic candidate X voted no on a balanced budget amendment, they are responsible for the deficit!" Of course, that is a lie since Republicans are the ones responsible for the wars and the unfunded tax breaks.

[Chan790]

17. Wrong place. n/t

[PoliticAverse]

12. The BBA will amount to nothing... n/t

[Prophet 451]

16. They've been doing that for years.

Surely you must have noticed that whenever there's a media furore (created by conservatives) about the national debt, in your country or mine, the first, last and only thing that ever gets put on the table is programs that poor people rely on.

A BBA would be economic and political suicide. You and I both know this. Politicians on both sides know this. The D's let it go up0 for a vote so they can get a debt ceiling raise. The R's force it up for a vote with no intention of letting it pass so they can go to their Teabagger base and say "we tried".

All this will be, all these things ever are, is a whip aimed at the poor. The US and UK simply despise poor people and are always looking for ways to hurt them.

[bigbrother05]

19. It's the conservatives that hate the poor

The really sad thing is that so many on the rigteed at keep voting in these ghouls are direct beneficiaries of the programs they want to destroy. They are being inflamed by rhetoric about the "other" and convinced that it will be directed at "them". It is so hard to cut through the media spin and political propaganda to have a reasoned discussion when fear and prejudice is so prominent.

The current economic stress on the general populace is a fertile ground for those who would enslave.